Supreme Court Restrains HC-Appointed Administrators From Taking Decisions For Elections Or Administration Of Church Of South India

 CSI Dispute: Supreme Court Restrains HC-Appointed Administrators From Taking Decisions For Elections Or Administration Of Church Of South India

Leave a Comment / By Arshiya Banu / 24 May 2024

In a recent judicial development, the Supreme Court of India intervened in the ongoing administrative conflict within the Church of South India (CSI). The Supreme Court has issued an order restraining administrators appointed by the High Court from making any decisions related to the elections or administration of the church.

Table of Contents

• Background
• Supreme Court’s Decision
• Implications
• Conclusion

Background

The dispute centers around the governance of the Church of South India, which has faced internal conflicts and allegations of mismanagement. In response, the High Court had appointed a committee of administrators to oversee the church’s affairs. However, this move was contested, leading to further legal battles.

Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court’s ruling came as an interim relief, maintaining the status quo and preventing the High Court-appointed administrators from taking over the church’s administration. The bench, acknowledging the complex nature of the dispute, emphasized the need for a careful and balanced approach to avoid further complications and ensure a fair resolution.

The court directed that no decisions regarding the church’s elections or administrative matters be made by the appointed administrators until the matter is fully resolved. This order aims to prevent any potential misuse of power and to maintain the integrity of the church’s governance structure during the ongoing legal proceedings.

Implications

This decision by the Supreme Court is significant as it highlights the judiciary’s role in maintaining order and fairness in religious and administrative disputes. By restraining the appointed administrators, the court has ensured that the church’s internal processes remain unaffected by external interventions, pending a final resolution.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s intervention in the Church of South India dispute underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding justice and preventing administrative overreach. As the case progresses, the focus will remain on finding a balanced and equitable solution that respects the church’s autonomy while addressing the concerns raised in the legal battle.

Missionaries and Christian British Looted 45$ Trillions - Chat GPT

 The figure of £45 trillion often cited as the value of British loot from India refers to estimates made by economists and historians who have analyzed the economic impact of British colonial rule in India. It is primarily derived from the work of scholars like Utsa Patnaik, who quantified the economic exploitation of India under British rule. Here's a summary of the concept:

Basis for the Estimate

1. Drain of Wealth: Between the mid-18th century (after the Battle of Plassey in 1757) and the mid-20th century, the British systematically transferred wealth out of India. This was done through:

   • Excessive taxation: Taxes were imposed on Indian farmers and workers, but the revenue was often used for British benefit.
   • Unfair trade practices: Indian goods were exported without fair compensation, while British manufactured goods flooded the Indian markets.
   • Loot of resources: Precious items like gold, silver, and diamonds were extracted and sent to Britain.

2. Utsa Patnaik's Work: In her 2018 paper, Patnaik estimated that over the course of 200 years of British rule, nearly $45 trillion (in today's currency, or about £45 trillion) worth of wealth was drained from India. This figure is based on:

   • India's contribution to British GDP.
   • Loss of local economic opportunities.
   • Export revenues appropriated by Britain, especially through "home charges" (payments made by the Indian government to Britain for administrative costs).

Evidence of Loot

• Economic Deindustrialization: India's share of global GDP fell dramatically under British rule:
  • In 1700: ~24% of global GDP.
  • In 1947: ~4% of global GDP.
• Famine and Poverty: Policies such as forced cultivation of cash crops led to devastating famines (e.g., Bengal famine of 1943), causing millions of deaths.

Criticism and Context

• Some historians argue that calculating the exact monetary loss is speculative and cannot fully capture the intangible costs, such as cultural loss and social disruption.
• Others emphasize that not all British colonialists were directly complicit in looting, and some infrastructure (railways, law systems) was introduced, albeit for British benefits.

The figure underscores the scale of exploitation but is not universally accepted in historical circles. Nevertheless, it aligns with India's long-standing grievances about the economic and social costs of colonialism.

CSI church elections - Retd High court committee - Judgements

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                              DATED: 05.06.2024

                                                    CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

                                            W.P.No.14375 of 2024
                                        & WMP.Nos.15617 & 15618 of 2024

                     Rev. B.Devaprasad                                     .... Petitioner

                                                   Vs

                     1. Church of South India,
                        Represented by its Administrators,
                        CSI Synod Secretariat,
                        CSI Centre, No 5, Whites Road,
                        Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014.

                     2. The Diocese of Madras,
                        Represented by General Secretary,
                        226, Cathedral Road,
                        Chennai 600 086.

                     3. Rev. Paul Francis
                     4. Rev. G. Welington Jesudoss
                     5. Rev. D.John Earnest Davidson
                     6. Rev. D.Mohanraj
                     7. Prof Dr.J.Samuel Cornelius

                                                                           .... Respondents
                     Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                     praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent herein
                     for recounting of the votes by the Committee of Administrators/person
                     appointed by the Committee of Administrators in presence of all the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                     1/6
                                                                                       W.P.No.14375 of 2024

                     nominees contested in the Bishopric election of 2nd respondent on
                     14.05.2024 based on the petitioner's representation dated 17.05.2024
                     within a time period stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.


                                        For Petitioner      : Mr.Vineet Subramani
                                                              for Ms.C.P.Niveda

                                        For Respondents : Mr.Ravikumar Paul (R1)
                                                          Senior Counsel
                                                          for M/s. Paul & Paul J. Hudson Samuel
                                                          & Partners

                                                            ORDER

The petitioner claims to be a communicant member of the Church of South India (CSI). The CSI has 24 dioceses each administered by a Diocesan Council headed by a Bishop. The petitioner is an aspirant for the post of Bishop of the Madras diocese and had stood for election for that post.

2. The procedure followed comprises both election and selection, in that Members of Dioceses elect four individuals to constitute a shortlist for the post of Bishop. The list is then forwarded to the Synod of the CSI which selects one of the four persons, for the position of Bishop.

3. In the present case, the petitioner has not made it to the shortlist and aggrieved seeks a mandamus directing R1, being the CSI represented by its Administrators, to be directed to re-count the votes in the presence https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of all nominees who had contested in the Bishop election held on 14.05.2024. The petitioner has not challenged the election per se.

4. The prayer is itself resisted by Mr.Ravikumar Paul, learned Senior Counsel for M/s.Paul and Paul for R1 on the ground that it is not maintainable.

5. The election has itself not been challenged and, in my view, having not questioned the election, there is little merit in seeking a re- counting of votes. In any event, there is yet another development that is relevant in the matter.

6. In a separate stream of litigation, O.S.A.No.198 of 2024 and connected appeals had been filed before this Court touching upon various issues relating to the functioning of the CSI and connected issues. It is unnecessary to refer to the issues per se.

7. Suffice to state that the OSAs were allowed and the Bench had thought it fit to appoint a Committee of Administrators comprising Justice R.Balasubramanian and Justice V.Bharathidasan, retired Judges of this Court to take immediate charge of the administration of the Church of South India as well as the Trust Association and administer the same till such time the elections of the Diocesan Councils are completed.

8. The aforesaid order was carried in appeal in SLP Nos.9079- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9081 of 2024, wherein, on 22.05.2024, the following order has been passed:

“1. Permission to file special leave petitions is granted.

2. Heard the learned senior counsel/ learned counsel for the petitioners as also the learned senior counsel/ learned counsel for the respondents who have entered appearance on caveat, at a considerable length. However, due to paucity of time, the arguments could not be completed.

3. Hence, list the matters in the 3rd week of July, 2024 on a nonmiscellaneous day for further hearing.

4. The learned Advocates on Record for the respondents, who have entered appearance on caveat, accept notices on behalf of their concerned respondent(s).

5. Issue notice to the unrepresented/ unserved respondent(s) in all the petitions.

6. In addition, Dasti service is permitted.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing even any prima facie opinion on the merits of the cases, it is hereby directed that the Administrators appointed by the High Court vide its impugned order dated 12th April, 2024, shall not take any decision either with regard to the holding election or administration of the Church of South India (CSI) and the CSI Trust Association till the next date of hearing.”

9. With the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 22.05.2024, there is a stalemate with regard to the functioning of the CSI https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis itself, as the Administrators appointed cannot take any decision either in regard to the holding of elections or administration of the CSI and CSI Trust Association, till the next date of hearing which has been fixed in the third week of July.

10. At this juncture, Mr.Vineet Subramani, learned counsel for the petitioner would only point out his apprehension that the votes in respect of the four persons selected to the shortlist are to be retained securely to ensure integrity of the election.

11. Mr.Paul for his part would submit that all votes have been handed over in a sealed cover to the Administrators which is now in their custody. With this, the grievance of the petitioner does not survive any further. As regards his prayer for re-counting he is at liberty to make such request before the Administrators themselves and it is for them to take a decision after hearing the petitioner and in line with the relevant rules and regulations, subject to orders from the Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 9079-9081 of 2024.

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

12. With this, this Writ Petition and the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.

05.06.2024 Sl Index:Yes/No Speaking order:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes To

1. Church of South India, Represented by its Administrators, CSI Synod Secretariat, CSI Centre, No 5, Whites Road, Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014.

2. The Diocese of Madras, Represented by General Secretary, 226, Cathedral Road, Chennai 600 086.

& WMP.Nos.15617 & 15618 of 2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

 

Madras High Court Orders Church Of South India Trust To Appear Before RoC, Respond To Charges Of Irregularities

M R Subramani

Feb 02, 2021, 02:15 PM | Updated 02:15 PM IST

Madras High Court (Picture Credits- Facebook/Readinfo)

The High Court found some of the allegations such as misappropriation of funds of SCI Kalyani Hospital in Chennai, CSI Christ Church at Gandhipuram in Coimbatore, various hospitals and educational institutions and sale or mortgage of the church’s land serious.

The Madras High Court has asked the Church of South India Trust Association (CSITA) to submit a detailed explanation to a Registrar of Companies (RoC) notice within two weeks on various allegations of irregularities by it.

The CSITA should also appear for enquiry at ROC, Chennai, between 17 February and 22 February without seeking any adjournment.

Following the completion of the enquiry, the ROC should submit a consolidated report to the Union government within two weeks without any delay.

On receipt of the RoC report, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs can form an independent opinion in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act and proceed further in accordance with Section 212 of the Act, which paves the way for a probe by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office.

Justice R Mahadevan of the High Court, giving his ruling on three petitions filed by CSITA and CSI Diocesan Treasurer against the government ordering an SFIO probe, said these steps were necessary to ensure "principles of natural justice".

CSITA, a registered organisation under Article 25 of the Companies Act as a non-profit organisation to manage the church’s properties, argued in its petition that it was not issued a show-cause notice and no reason was given for the government’s conclusion to order the SFIO probe.

The judge, however, rejected the petitioners’ plea to quash the government order to institute an SFIO probe in view of the serious nature of the allegations against CSITA “in the interest of justice”.

The petitions were filed based on a 2 June 2016 letter from the RoC regional director in Chennai recommending an SFIO probe. The Centre ordered the probe on 10 June 2016.

The order was challenged by the CSITA Medak Diocese in the Telangana and Andhra High Court, which set it aside and referred it back to the Union government to exercise its jurisdiction.

Before the Telangana and Andhra High Court order could be passed, the Madras High Court was also moved over the order. However, the Madras High Court dismissed the petitions on 22 February 2018 as premature.

Thereafter, the Centre issued an order on 7 May 2018 based on the RoC report highlighting certain issues requiring it to order the SFIO probe in public interest.

This was challenged by CSITA, arguing that it had not been heard nor provided the reasons.

On 19 September 2018, the CSI Madras Diocesan Treasurer was issued summons, leading to it being challenged along with other petitions against the SFIO probe.

The High Court found some of the allegations such as misappropriation of funds of SCI Kalyani Hospital in Chennai, CSI Christ Church at Gandhipuram in Coimbatore, various hospitals and educational institutions and sale or mortgage of the church’s land serious.

Other allegations were that “the CSI and its constituent Diocesan Units, taking advantage of the corporate personality of the CSITA, have availed bank loans by creating charges on the immovable and movable properties, tax benefits, suing the property disputes, etc.,” the judge observed.

The functioning of CSITA has proved to be CSI’s nemesis as church members have utilised the provisions of the Companies Act to question the various irregularities within the CSI.

The CSITA is registered as a non-profit organisation to help the organisation get tax exemptions to the tune of Rs 2,000 crore every year.

The CSI has a huge amount of money and properties, besides managing over 5,000 educational institutions across southern India.

Its assets in southern India are valued at about Rs 1 lakh crore and the church reportedly receives at least Rs 1,000 crore annually in the form of donations and various other offerings.

A tug of war among the administrators resulted in the tribunal removing all directors and the managing committee on 18 November 2016.

Findings by the Registrar of Companies (RoC), submitted through a report on 12 January 2016, showed a few irregularities in CSITA’s functioning.

One of the complaints against CSITA was that the memorandum of association (MoA) and articles of association (AoA) were amended without the approval of the Union government.

The RoC also found that 21 CSITA officials of Coimbatore and Kanyakumari dioceses, including bishops, were facing criminal charges for misappropriation of funds, including the illegal sale of lands, and yet, were involved in financial administration.

Church of South India, Excluding Church Functions, Subject to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226: Madras High Court

 

Church of South India, Excluding Church Functions, Subject to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226: Madras High Court

• Salil Tiwari   
• 12:47 PM, 01 Mar 2024

Read Time: 09 minutes

Synopsis

The public duty that CSI and the Church of South India Trust Association (CSITA) discharge falls within the contours of Article 21 and 21A of the Constitution of India, the full bench held

In a significant ruling on Thursday, a full bench of the Madras High Court declared that the Church of South India (CSI), despite being a private religious entity, is subject to the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution.

The bench of Justices R Subramanian, PT Asha, and N Senthilkumar concurred that due to the CSI's oversight of numerous educational institutions and hospitals, it is engaged in a public duty. Consequently, the judgment stated that writ petitions related to these public duties are admissible.

The matter was referred to the full bench after division benches of the high court expressed conflicting opinions regarding the maintainability of writ petitions against CSI.

In 2014, one division bench approved the invocation of the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Church of South India, whereas, another division bench in 2017, held that since the diocese is a private body but not discharging any public duty, therefore, it cannot be given any direction by invoking extraordinary power conferred to the high court under Article 226.

Thereafter, in 2019, in a batch of writ petitions, another single judge bench, held that since the Diocese was running several institutions, hospitals and Aided institutions etc, they were discharging public functions, therefore, a dispute relating to these were amenable to the writ jurisdiction. However, the single judge clarified that matters relating to the elections to the Diocese Council and the constitution of the various branches of committees of the CSI falls outside the scope of the writ jurisdiction.

This order was then upheld by another division bench in 2020, which allowed the institution of a writ petition against the CSI. 

Therefore, before the full bench, a question as to "whether a writ petition invoking the jurisdiction of the high court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India lies against the CSI which is only a private body, and if so, to what extent/circumstances such writs would lie"? was placed before the high court.

The full bench held that in simple terms, public duty would mean a duty in discharge of which the State, Public or the Community at large has an interest and likewise, a public function would generally mean a function for the general public serving the public good.

It highlighted that CSI runs 2300 schools, 150 colleges and 104 hospitals in South India and its functions not only include worship and theology but also encompassing education and health care.

Further, while referring to the top court's judgment in Dwarka Nath Vs Income Tax Officer, court held that the term “any person or authority” used in Article 226 requires a liberal interpretation where such person or authority performs a public duty. 

In view of the above, the full bench held that CSI "is definitely discharging the public function and if any action taken by them which is detrimental to the discharge of this duty, a writ petition would definitely be maintainable".

"Unlike, Article 32 of the Constitution of India any person even if he is not a person aggrieved can invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India," court further clarified. 

Accordingly, court made the following observations:

- The public duty that CSI and the Church of South India Trust Association (CSITA) discharge falls within the contours of Article 21 and 21A of the Constitution of India.

- Since the educational institutions run by CSI and CSITA, both aided as well as unaided, are bound by statutory regulations of varying degrees, they are amenable to the writ jurisdiction.

- Any act of the management who are in the administration of these institutes/hospitals likely to bring down the standards of both education as well as medical services can be challenged by any person invoking the rights under Article 226 and in that sense, CSI and CSITA would fall within the category of any person or authority as described under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

- The functions of CSI and CSITA pertaining to the maintenance of the churches and discharging functions of the clergy, are outside the scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Case Title: D.Bright Joseph v. Church of South India (CSI) and Others 

CSI - Church of South India is a Company: Madras High Court

 Church of South India is a Company: Madras High Court

March 28, 2012

The Madras High Court has stated that the Church of South India is a company and is liable to submit its accounts for inspection to the Registrar of Companies. The CSI had registered itself as a company under the Companies Act, in 1947- 1948. The order to this effect was passed recently by Justice S Rajeswaran, following a complaint lodged by John S Durai, a CSI member. The petitioner alleged that CSI was misusing the funds under foreign exchange account. The writ petition filed by Durai sought for a directive to scrutinize CSI accounts.

Justice Rajeswaran said that the CSI was indeed a registered company. He said, “Only after getting clearance from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs the impugned action has been taken under the provision of law…The contention of the CSI counsel is of no merits and the proceedings cannot be questioned at all by the CSI Trust Association.”

Following the petition filed by Durai, Madras High Court directed the RoC to follow up on the matter, wherein a preliminary probe was carried out. The investigation confirmed the allegations made by the petitioner. The RoC was also granted permission from the Central Ministry for conducting a detailed probe into the financial matters of the CSI, under Section 209A of the Companies Act.

A showcause notice was also filed against the CSI Trust Association on 30 August, 2011, stating the commencement of an inspection on 12 September, 2011. The notice also stated that CSI authorities should keep their account books ready. However, the CSI authorities sought an extension of the audit exercise by a week’s time on 19 September, 2011.

However, the CSI moved to High Court against the showcause notice, seeking an extension from the RoC and subsequently questioning the registrar’s powers in inspecting their matters. But the matter was pursued by Durai who informed the HC that CSI was a “habitual defaulter in filing the statutory returns in time, and also not in the habit of replying to the genuine queries raised by the registrar regarding complaints received against the CSI”.

http://indiawires.com/9352/news/national/church-of-south-india-is-a-company-madras-high-court/

Madras HC orders CBI probe into illegal sale of 1000 Crore CSI Church land

 

Madras HC orders CBI probe into illegal sale of Church land

Justice K K Ramakrishnan passed the order based on a PIL filed by D Devasahayam, president of Christian Minorities Unit.

Image of a gavel used for representational purposes onlyFile photo

Express News Service

Updated on: 

24 Nov 2024, 9:40 am

2 min read

MADURAI: The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court has ordered the CBI to file a case against Church of South India Trust Association (CSITA), Church of South India (CSI) Madurai Ramnad Diocese, unnamed government officials, and private individuals to probe into the alleged illegal sale of 31.10 acres of government land worth crores of rupees at Tallakulam in the heart of Madurai city by these entities.

Justice K K Ramakrishnan passed the order based on a PIL filed by D Devasahayam, president of Christian Minorities Unit.

The PIL said that 31.10 acres of land at Tallakulam was provided by the government to American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions (ABCFM) (later known as United Church Board for World Ministries) for the purpose of establishing an industrial home for needy women and to carry out farming and use the income generated through it for the welfare of the inmates of the home.

‘Land to be restored to govt if not used for intended purpose’

By violating these conditions, the Lay Secretary of Church of South India (Madurai-Ramnad Diocese), in connivance with government officials and others, fabricated the power deed and sold the property to private persons, the petitioner claimed.

The court after hearing the submissions of the parties said the properties of United Church Board for World Ministries were transferred to the Church of South India Trust Association (CSITA) and the directors of the CSITA conspired and colluded with the administrators of the CSI Madurai Ramnad Diocese to sell the properties illegally through a fabricated power deed. The court perused the order of the division bench of the court in another PIL on the issue to arrive at a conclusion that materials disclose a prima facie case for investigation by the CBI. The judge also referred to a resumption clause in the government order which said that if the land is not used for the intended purpose, it should be restored back to the government.

The court said the government is still the owner of the property and the church authority has no jurisdiction to sell the property. Earlier, funds flowed from homes to churches, but now since conscientious are not occupying the chair of the church administration, church properties are being swindled by administrators in violation of the tenets of bible. The bishop and other administrators of the church are duty bound to use the property for its dedicated purpose, the judge said. “Every religion promotes charity for the needy with the belief that charities are done by the God himself. It is the faith of all religions that whenever there is a miserable condition, God sends humans to perform charity. People, nowadays, are going against their own religion and faith,” the judge said.